Devendranath Hurnam v Kailashing Bholah and Soobashsing Bholah

Devendranath Hurnam v Kailashing Bholah and Soobashsing Bholah

The initiation and prosecution of the present civil action by Mr Hurnam constitutes an abuse of process because its purpose is to mount a collateral attack on his criminal conviction, which was affirmed by the Supreme Court and the Privy Council. The action is illegitimate and must be struck out. Additionally, the claim against Soobash is barred by absolute witness immunity for evidence given at trial.

Citation
[2010] UKPC 12
Parties
Appellant: Devendranath Hurnam; Respondent: Kailashing Bholah; Respondent: Soobashsing Bholah; Intervener: Satyajit Boolell SC DPP
Jurisdiction
United Kingdom
Judgment Date
12 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal to Privy Council From Supreme Court of Mauritius
Outcome
action struck out as abuse of process
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Collateral Attack, Witness Immunity, Issue Estoppel
Civil Procedure Criminal Law Evidence Abuse of Process Collateral Attack Witness Immunity Issue Estoppel

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Devendranath Hurnam

Appellant

Kailashing Bholah

Respondent

Soobashsing Bholah

Respondent

Satyajit Boolell SC DPP

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal to Privy Council From Supreme Court of Mauritius

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the civil proceedings initiated by Mr Hurnam constitute an abuse of process as a collateral attack on his criminal conviction
  2. 2 Whether the action should be struck out as an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether witness immunity bars the claim against Soobash

Ratio Decidendi

The initiation and prosecution of the present civil action by Mr Hurnam constitutes an abuse of process because its purpose is to mount a collateral attack on his criminal conviction, which was affirmed by the Supreme Court and the Privy Council. The action is illegitimate and must be struck out. Additionally, the claim against Soobash is barred by absolute witness immunity for evidence given at trial.

Court Disposition

action struck out as abuse of process

Orders

  • The action is struck out as an abuse of process.
  • The appellant and the intervener to make submissions in writing on costs within 28 days.